Oil on earth may or may not be finite (see abiogenic origin hypothesis), but it's definitely not enough to supply a cosmos-spanning species with essentials such as plastic and axle grease. Could this sort of an alcohol cloud be mined for hydrocarbons?
What's this "fair" thing? Do you think real life is a sport? The laws of the market are as harsh as evolution and will have no compassion for slackers who demand to be natural and can't keep up.
Once science conquers sleep, which provigil points out as a near-future or present proposition, I fully expect the culture to go 24/7. Two jobs, or a job and a hobby, or even a continuous work week from monday to friday with shower breaks every few hours. "He sleeps every day of the week? My god, what a slob! How can he afford rent?"
Most of these problems are the result of informational inefficiencies. So therefore, don't count on them continuing! The status quo may look like it's set in stone, but it's quite plausible to imagine that in a few years, some Google will crack the dataflow problems, and give the world big business that actually works on quality rather than politics.
Back in the day, witetapping was for phones, for some phones (because the tech wasn't there to snoop en masse), and it impacted most people not at all. It was a tool against crooks.
Nowadays and increasingly, we are going to be always online, always interconnected, sending and recieving, and faced with interception that could theoretically be continuous - a panopticon. Or, we could decide that the government can no longer own that power, and snatch it back from them.
I'd like to see the USA introduce a new constitutional amendment: "the right of the people to be secure in their persons and posessions against communication monitoring or interception shall not be infringed".
Nah, personally I prefer the "It's my computer, my hard disk, my network wire, and I'm paying the ISP for neutral bandwidth. If I wanna download, your government-granted monopoly can kiss my ass" rationalization.
About as much as they can pile onto a system for performing rapid repetitive computations.
Or as much as they can pile onto a program designed to launch, manage, and standardize the interface of other programs.
What you're seeing is evolution, which takes the status quo as a given, and manipulates it towards whatever is presently more convenient, speciating as necessary. Paraphrasing a quote about Fortran: I don't know what they'll use in 2046, but some small subsystem of it will probably be lineally descended, at least in conceptual abstract, from a web browser.
One: run all Chinese PC on Linux. Two: run all foreign devil PC on Windows. Three: export hacker, import geek. Four: Only Chinese PC still work. Rest of world collapse to barbarism. Five: Chinese people rule world. Profit.
1) Encrypt your swap. Not hard especially on Linux. If you must run an OS that can't encrypt its swap, virtualise it. Windows on VMWare on Linux, or whatever.
2) Don't trust hardware crypto. You didn't write it, can't read it. The NSA probably pwns the keys. Do crypto in software with peer-reviewed open source.
Mining, interplanetary and asteroid-mining rocket bases, drop-off point for stuff intended for trans-shipment to earth, solar collection for energy, vacuum and low-G manufacturing, comms, dangerous science, nuclear power plants and intensive farming. Those are just off the top of my head.
...but to begin with, and to establish the base, a large parabolic reflector is a whole lot quicker and less finicky to set up than a hydroponic air-farm.
You forget that this only works your way iff the government can call on a modern army to do its fighting. That's easy enough against Baathist nutters in Iraq. However, in recent history, armies have tended to sit out internal revolutions. They chose their job to defend, not attack civilians. Modern armies are harder to push into atrocities they don't wanna, on account of being trained professionals, rather than whipped cannon fodder.
That's absolutely not the case. Short of a profiler picking up a specific bottleneck, code optimization is a last resort and is generally the least effective way to speed up running code. A casual O(1) algorithm will kick the pants of an O(log n) in custom assembler. And, data structures which includes save files implicitly define a reader algorithm. Therefore, proper data structure design is a major win.
An IDE will be infinitely better than vi at showing them the internal interconnections of a program, and helping them (through syntax coloring) conceptualize the different parts of the language.
Teach low level tools like javac and ant seperately and second after they already grok the language.
Number 3 on your list is dubious. Example, firefox. As an outsider it seems to me lot of nifty stuff is "in CVS" and being eternally bumped into the next-but-one release, so please wait patiently. Sort of like those train arrival time announcement boards that say "due in 5 minutes" and still do 5 minutes later. It's a fob-off.
At a guess, it's the same reason that LaTeX has huge margins: lines are easiest to read with a certain number of characters per line, approximately 60. More, and your eye gets lost and wanders, fewer, and your eye has to do too many "carriage returns".
The same people who provide a "national food service". (Which of course doesn't exist and would be a stale-bread nightmare.)
Here in the UK, health before nationalization was provided in approximately 3 ways. (1) cash on the nail, from yourself or from your extended family at a pinch (2) insurance, including mutual insurance through clubs (3) charity, both religious and secular. A lot of hopitals were philanthopic charities. A lot of doctors would take charity patients or some downgrade on cash such as payment in kind (barter).
As a libertarian myself I'd say it goes deeper. So much of the jargon is not merely reinforcing the state, but reinforcing a whole solid coercive-collectivist-altruist worldview.
Consider "providing for the needs of society". Providing what, from whom, to whom, collected how, distributed how, for which needs, who determines the need, why are needs an excuse to provide, and how can a society have needs when a society is an aggregate of individuals? It's so utterly steeped in assumptions that it's well nigh impossible to even argue in those terms without falsely conceding nine-tenths the argument.
Your analogy is apt, your conclusion is flawed. The proper conclusion is: it is no longer supportable for the government to have the "right" to wiretap anything, anywhere. Law enforcement must give that power up, becuse it has begun to present far more problems than it could possibly solve.
Bad water makes it worse, and good water is hard. It requires infrastructure and/or technology that these places may not have. Rice, by contrast, is a plant that pretty much grows itself. It's also far easier to get into third world countries than money for better infrastructure (which tends to gravitate rather rapidly to corrupt officials).
Far from earning a place in hell, this is another example where making profits and doing good for the world are one and the same thing.
Not coincidentally, new Perl (version 6) has abandoned this model. They're going for "the spec is definitive" rather than "the implementation is definitive". There are already two-plus implementations of Perl 6, the most far ahead of which isn't even the official version.
Firstly, IBM are the good guys nowadays. They like open source, because they make their money selling integrated systems and it's nice if someone else does the donkey work.
Second, MS may be as evil as they ever were, but the whole "they'll fork Java" thing is so 1990s. Java is (a) very very solidly entrenched in its serverware and small cross platform app niche (b) a competitor to their flagship C#, so the last thing they want is draw people back to Java, of any fork or species.
Microsoft's probable response to OSS Java, would be to comb through the source code for bugs, and call a press conference to announce "one gadzillion bugs found in open source Java, more probably exist".
Yeah. Bush being eeeevil, has dedicated the last four and a bit CPU-years of the Pentagon's secret beowulf cluster of Crays to rendering the snazziest pseudo-real computer graphics since that Final Fantasy movie they made so much fuss over a few years back. All in order to cover up the huge Texaco oil truck backing up to the wall, a guy in a ten-gallon hat getting out, unreeling and lighting a fuse, and scarpering in an unmarked black helicopter full of G-men.
Slashdot Mirror
"[...]a few people might complain about losing San Francisco and New York to rising water levels."
As a species though, even as a culture, the long term (100+ years perspective) impact would be minimal. We'd rebuild inland and carry on.
Oil on earth may or may not be finite (see abiogenic origin hypothesis), but it's definitely not enough to supply a cosmos-spanning species with essentials such as plastic and axle grease. Could this sort of an alcohol cloud be mined for hydrocarbons?
What's this "fair" thing? Do you think real life is a sport? The laws of the market are as harsh as evolution and will have no compassion for slackers who demand to be natural and can't keep up.
Once science conquers sleep, which provigil points out as a near-future or present proposition, I fully expect the culture to go 24/7. Two jobs, or a job and a hobby, or even a continuous work week from monday to friday with shower breaks every few hours. "He sleeps every day of the week? My god, what a slob! How can he afford rent?"
Most of these problems are the result of informational inefficiencies. So therefore, don't count on them continuing! The status quo may look like it's set in stone, but it's quite plausible to imagine that in a few years, some Google will crack the dataflow problems, and give the world big business that actually works on quality rather than politics.
Back in the day, witetapping was for phones, for some phones (because the tech wasn't there to snoop en masse), and it impacted most people not at all. It was a tool against crooks.
Nowadays and increasingly, we are going to be always online, always interconnected, sending and recieving, and faced with interception that could theoretically be continuous - a panopticon. Or, we could decide that the government can no longer own that power, and snatch it back from them.
I'd like to see the USA introduce a new constitutional amendment: "the right of the people to be secure in their persons and posessions against communication monitoring or interception shall not be infringed".
Nah, personally I prefer the "It's my computer, my hard disk, my network wire, and I'm paying the ISP for neutral bandwidth. If I wanna download, your government-granted monopoly can kiss my ass" rationalization.
About as much as they can pile onto a system for performing rapid repetitive computations.
Or as much as they can pile onto a program designed to launch, manage, and standardize the interface of other programs.
What you're seeing is evolution, which takes the status quo as a given, and manipulates it towards whatever is presently more convenient, speciating as necessary. Paraphrasing a quote about Fortran: I don't know what they'll use in 2046, but some small subsystem of it will probably be lineally descended, at least in conceptual abstract, from a web browser.
One: run all Chinese PC on Linux.
Two: run all foreign devil PC on Windows.
Three: export hacker, import geek.
Four: Only Chinese PC still work. Rest of world collapse to barbarism.
Five: Chinese people rule world. Profit.
1) Encrypt your swap. Not hard especially on Linux. If you must run an OS that can't encrypt its swap, virtualise it. Windows on VMWare on Linux, or whatever.
2) Don't trust hardware crypto. You didn't write it, can't read it. The NSA probably pwns the keys. Do crypto in software with peer-reviewed open source.
Mining, interplanetary and asteroid-mining rocket bases, drop-off point for stuff intended for trans-shipment to earth, solar collection for energy, vacuum and low-G manufacturing, comms, dangerous science, nuclear power plants and intensive farming. Those are just off the top of my head.
...but to begin with, and to establish the base, a large parabolic reflector is a whole lot quicker and less finicky to set up than a hydroponic air-farm.
You forget that this only works your way iff the government can call on a modern army to do its fighting. That's easy enough against Baathist nutters in Iraq. However, in recent history, armies have tended to sit out internal revolutions. They chose their job to defend, not attack civilians. Modern armies are harder to push into atrocities they don't wanna, on account of being trained professionals, rather than whipped cannon fodder.
That's absolutely not the case. Short of a profiler picking up a specific bottleneck, code optimization is a last resort and is generally the least effective way to speed up running code. A casual O(1) algorithm will kick the pants of an O(log n) in custom assembler. And, data structures which includes save files implicitly define a reader algorithm. Therefore, proper data structure design is a major win.
An IDE will be infinitely better than vi at showing them the internal interconnections of a program, and helping them (through syntax coloring) conceptualize the different parts of the language.
Teach low level tools like javac and ant seperately and second after they already grok the language.
Number 3 on your list is dubious. Example, firefox. As an outsider it seems to me lot of nifty stuff is "in CVS" and being eternally bumped into the next-but-one release, so please wait patiently. Sort of like those train arrival time announcement boards that say "due in 5 minutes" and still do 5 minutes later. It's a fob-off.
I have a suspicion those spammers will rue this day like the RIAA rues Napster. "Oh my god, what have we wrought?"
At a guess, it's the same reason that LaTeX has huge margins: lines are easiest to read with a certain number of characters per line, approximately 60. More, and your eye gets lost and wanders, fewer, and your eye has to do too many "carriage returns".
The same people who provide a "national food service". (Which of course doesn't exist and would be a stale-bread nightmare.)
Here in the UK, health before nationalization was provided in approximately 3 ways. (1) cash on the nail, from yourself or from your extended family at a pinch (2) insurance, including mutual insurance through clubs (3) charity, both religious and secular. A lot of hopitals were philanthopic charities. A lot of doctors would take charity patients or some downgrade on cash such as payment in kind (barter).
As a libertarian myself I'd say it goes deeper. So much of the jargon is not merely reinforcing the state, but reinforcing a whole solid coercive-collectivist-altruist worldview.
Consider "providing for the needs of society". Providing what, from whom, to whom, collected how, distributed how, for which needs, who determines the need, why are needs an excuse to provide, and how can a society have needs when a society is an aggregate of individuals? It's so utterly steeped in assumptions that it's well nigh impossible to even argue in those terms without falsely conceding nine-tenths the argument.
Your analogy is apt, your conclusion is flawed. The proper conclusion is: it is no longer supportable for the government to have the "right" to wiretap anything, anywhere. Law enforcement must give that power up, becuse it has begun to present far more problems than it could possibly solve.
Bad water makes it worse, and good water is hard. It requires infrastructure and/or technology that these places may not have. Rice, by contrast, is a plant that pretty much grows itself. It's also far easier to get into third world countries than money for better infrastructure (which tends to gravitate rather rapidly to corrupt officials).
Far from earning a place in hell, this is another example where making profits and doing good for the world are one and the same thing.
Not coincidentally, new Perl (version 6) has abandoned this model. They're going for "the spec is definitive" rather than "the implementation is definitive". There are already two-plus implementations of Perl 6, the most far ahead of which isn't even the official version.
Firstly, IBM are the good guys nowadays. They like open source, because they make their money selling integrated systems and it's nice if someone else does the donkey work.
Second, MS may be as evil as they ever were, but the whole "they'll fork Java" thing is so 1990s. Java is (a) very very solidly entrenched in its serverware and small cross platform app niche (b) a competitor to their flagship C#, so the last thing they want is draw people back to Java, of any fork or species.
Microsoft's probable response to OSS Java, would be to comb through the source code for bugs, and call a press conference to announce "one gadzillion bugs found in open source Java, more probably exist".
Yeah. Bush being eeeevil, has dedicated the last four and a bit CPU-years of the Pentagon's secret beowulf cluster of Crays to rendering the snazziest pseudo-real computer graphics since that Final Fantasy movie they made so much fuss over a few years back. All in order to cover up the huge Texaco oil truck backing up to the wall, a guy in a ten-gallon hat getting out, unreeling and lighting a fuse, and scarpering in an unmarked black helicopter full of G-men.
So what we're talking here is a species that hunts humans, mated with a species that's known for being grumpy, vicious and well nigh indestructible.
Thank god this guy killed it! Jail time heck, give the man a medal.